Jump to content
modestobulldog

Game Thread: Impeachment

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, #1Stunner said:

Jimmy Dore is a liberal democrat, who has worked on the Young Turks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Dore

Thanks. I didn't read what he wrote but his being a liberal doesn't mean he isn't an idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, alum93 said:

Good, you understand it's not about him saying mean things. 

Please.  This whole thing is just a vehicle for venting their dislike.  If it was about anything else, they would go through the torturous process of getting people with actual first-hand knowledge to make statements on the record.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BYUcougfan said:

Please.  This whole thing is just a vehicle for venting their dislike.  If it was about anything else, they would go through the torturous process of getting people with actual first-hand knowledge to make statements on the record.

Uhm, that's happened. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, alum93 said:

No, that isn't what this is about.  Even if you are 100% behind Trump staying, you can still be educated on what the inquiry is about and what evidence has been presented.

According to Pelosi you need to read the impeachment testimony to know what’s in it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, BYUcougfan said:

Please.  This whole thing is just a vehicle for venting their dislike.  If it was about anything else, they would go through the torturous process of getting people with actual first-hand knowledge to make statements on the record.

This slash and burn tactic by the Dems will outdo anything they have ever done in history to try and gain an election advantage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, THEUniversityofNevada said:

Hover over their name. The option will pop up.

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, edluvar said:

I would like to see this video. Being an expert in all things Obama I bet you have it bookmarked.  

You have already seen it.  You just don't care.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, BYUcougfan said:

That is ridiculous.  If he actually commits a crime then get rid of him.  The only "evidence" is the call transcript.  The witnesses called by the Democrats have all had to admit they have no first hand knowledge.

I am not a huge Trump fan, although I do find his ability to trigger leftists immensely entertaining.  I am not willing to have him impeached because he says mean things....which is what this is mostly about.  It is not the lies he tells that you don't like, it is the truths, no matter how boorish and non PC.  The press hate him because he does not dance to their tune and does not need them to get an unfiltered message out.  He never apologizes...even when he should...and never seems to pay a price for it, which drives the political class crazy.  They live for forced and insincere apologies.

I don't like Trump on a personal level, but that does not mean I am going to embrace Democrats and all of their nonsense.  In 2020, the choice is not going to be between Trump and George Washington or Trump and Abraham Lincoln.  It will be between Trump and mostly likely some deranged leftist Democrat.

What's ridiculous are your goal posts.

First of all, for the 1,000th time there is no statutory crime requirement for impeachment. 

Mulvaney, the president's chief of staff, admitted on tv there was a quid pro quo on the aid and every state dept official operating in Ukraine somehow understood it was about the announcement of investigations and/or the white house visit and said so under oath, including a guy that paid Trump 1,000,000 bucks to be an ambassador. Then of course, the transcript where Trump asks for the investigations which corroborates the witness testimony. 

But you want Trump on video signing a bribe contract with a notary present or something. K. 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bluerules009 said:

You have already seen it.  You just don't care.

 

 

 

I just sent a copy to Jim Risch.   My hope is now that he is aware of it hopefully some kind of investigation can be launched.    I can’t believe the Republicans didn’t know about this.   Way bigger deal than him being Kenyan 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, edluvar said:

I just sent a copy to Jim Risch.   My hope is now that he is aware of it hopefully some kind of investigation can be launched.    I can’t believe the Republicans didn’t know about this.   Way bigger deal than him being Kenyan 

Asking for political favors from Russians, why didn't you rail against him and try to get him impeached?

 

Just another example of your bias and total inability to think clearly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, toonkee said:

What's ridiculous are your goal posts.

First of all, for the 1,000th time there is no statutory crime requirement for impeachment. 

Mulvaney, the president's chief of staff, admitted on tv there was a quid pro quo on the aid and every state dept official operating in Ukraine somehow understood it was about the announcement of investigations and/or the white house visit and said so under oath, including a guy that paid Trump 1,000,000 bucks to be an ambassador. Then of course, the transcript where Trump asks for the investigations which corroborates the witness testimony. 

But you want Trump on video signing a bribe contract with a notary present or something. K. 

 

 

If we at least are not going to look for a crime, then you have no goal post whatsoever.  That is fine.  The Constitution is fairly vague here.

I can't remember all of the testimony verbatim, but I thought Mulvaney admitted it was his assumption this was the case and he was not told this by Trump or by the Administration in general.  So, it was his opinion.  Not saying he was not right, but it was his opinion....not proof.  We should have proof if we are going to impeach presidents.  Otherwise presidents are going to be impeached every time their party does not control the congress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, bluerules009 said:

Asking for political favors from Russians, why didn't you rail against him and try to get him impeached?

 

Just another example of your bias and total inability to think clearly.

I think we should impeach Obama right now.   He is a socialist Benghazi loving Kenyan 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, retrofade said:

Uhm, that's happened. 

Who did they get to testify that had any first hand knowledge to substantiate a charge of "quid pro quo" or "bribery"?

Both of the main guys testified that they had no direct knowledge of anything.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, edluvar said:

I just sent a copy to Jim Risch.   My hope is now that he is aware of it hopefully some kind of investigation can be launched.    I can’t believe the Republicans didn’t know about this.   Way bigger deal than him being Kenyan 

I missed the part where he held up military aid approved by Congress while asking for a favor.  What favor?  The start of an investigation on the son of a political rival.  Other than that,  video makes perfect sense :-)   The Kenyan line was a favorite of some on the right.  A certain president even mentioned it on multiple occasions.  

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, toonkee said:

What's ridiculous are your goal posts.

First of all, for the 1,000th time there is no statutory crime requirement for impeachment. 

Mulvaney, the president's chief of staff, admitted on tv there was a quid pro quo on the aid and every state dept official operating in Ukraine somehow understood it was about the announcement of investigations and/or the white house visit and said so under oath, including a guy that paid Trump 1,000,000 bucks to be an ambassador. Then of course, the transcript where Trump asks for the investigations which corroborates the witness testimony. 

But you want Trump on video signing a bribe contract with a notary present or something. K. 

 

 

The requirement is that there needs to be:

 

the Constitution, which limits the grounds for impeachment to “treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

These are the necessary but not sufficient conditions for removing a president.

In addition to committing one or more of these designated offenses, the person to be removed must have violated the public trust or abused his office. These criteria are in addition to those explicitly set out in the Constitution. They are not substitutes for the constitutional prerequisites for impeachment and removal.

 

the Democrats have already stated that the infraction (high crime and misdemeanor) is Bribery / Quid Pro Quo.

So far, the only real evidence that has been offered to prove these crimes is a telephone transcript. 

There isn't any testimony that proves them (both witnesses stated that they had no direct knowledge of Trump trying to orchestrate a Bribery or Quid Pro Quo with Ukraine).

Plus, wasn't the money provided to Ukraine, without Ukraine investigating Joe Biden?   (SO...no circumstantial evidence of a bribery or quid pro quo)

 

What evidence are we not seeing that you see that proves the "Bribery, High Crime and Misdemeanor"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, #1Stunner said:

The requirement is that there needs to be:

 

the Constitution, which limits the grounds for impeachment to “treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

These are the necessary but not sufficient conditions for removing a president.

In addition to committing one or more of these designated offenses, the person to be removed must have violated the public trust or abused his office. These criteria are in addition to those explicitly set out in the Constitution. They are not substitutes for the constitutional prerequisites for impeachment and removal.

 

the Democrats have already stated that the infraction (high crime and misdemeanor) is Bribery / Quid Pro Quo.

So far, the only real evidence that has been offered to prove these crimes is a telephone transcript. 

There isn't any testimony that proves them (both witnesses stated that they had no direct knowledge of Trump trying to orchestrate a Bribery or Quid Pro Quo with Ukraine).

Plus, wasn't the money provided to Ukraine, without Ukraine investigating Joe Biden?

 

What evidence are we not seeing that you see that proves the "High Crime and Misdemeanor"?

Stunner, i am behind by a few dozen pages but i notice you have been particularly proactive in your video posts.  Can you give me a top 10 ranking so i can start with the best ones?  I mean, i'm sure guys like Tucker and Jeanine and Ann are on top of their games, but did any of them light your fire more than the others?   I want to make sure i get the bestest info from Fox News and evidently you are all over it today.  Thanks in advance. 

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, alum93 said:

Stunner, i am behind by a few dozen pages but i notice you have been particularly proactive in your video posts.  Can you give me a top 10 ranking so i can start with the best ones?  I mean, i'm sure guys like Tucker and Jeanine and Ann are on top of their games, but did any of them light your fire more than the others?   I want to make sure i get the bestest info from Fox News and evidently you are all over it today.  Thanks in advance. 

I got the sharing tweet and video idea from Democratic sympathetic posters....

I hope to encourage discussion and mutual learning by sharing many, many, many, tweets and videos, from popular conservative media sources (even those I don't agree with).

If you see a video that peaks your interest, please let me know.

The worst thing ever would be to have an "echo chamber" that only presents sources from one political side. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, #1Stunner said:

The requirement is that there needs to be:

 

the Constitution, which limits the grounds for impeachment to “treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

These are the necessary but not sufficient conditions for removing a president.

In addition to committing one or more of these designated offenses, the person to be removed must have violated the public trust or abused his office. These criteria are in addition to those explicitly set out in the Constitution. They are not substitutes for the constitutional prerequisites for impeachment and removal.

 

the Democrats have already stated that the infraction (high crime and misdemeanor) is Bribery / Quid Pro Quo.

So far, the only real evidence that has been offered to prove these crimes is a telephone transcript. 

There isn't any testimony that proves them (both witnesses stated that they had no direct knowledge of Trump trying to orchestrate a Bribery or Quid Pro Quo with Ukraine).

Plus, wasn't the money provided to Ukraine, without Ukraine investigating Joe Biden?

 

What evidence are we not seeing that you see that proves the "High Crime and Misdemeanor"?

So Dershowitz decides what is sufficient for removal "in addition" to the requirements stated in the constitution and I'm supposed to move a discussion forward based on that? 

No thanks.

 

 

  • Cheers 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×